The whole "We were bamboozled" line by the players was just stupid. Like the owners are going to agree verbally with the players about things then write up a contract with something else written. It's not like the players are the only ones reviewing the contacts they have lawyers reading it too. Sign the stupid thing so we can start the fun!

Despite the fact that Bills safety and NFLPA* representative George Wilson called reports that the players will vote Friday on the proposed, pre-approved labor deal untrue, ESPN’s Chris Mortensen (or, as Donte’ Stallworth referred to him during an ESPN phoner, “Morten Andersen”) reports that the players are indeed expected to vote on the proposal Friday.

“All in all, despite the games that were played by the NFL, things look much more optimistic,” a source in player leadership told Mortensen.

That meshes with something we were told in the immediate wake of what appeared to be the ultimate switch-and-bait by the NFL, with the owners supposedly changing up some terms and then hoping the players would feel pressured to pounce. Despite the move, optimism remains in place within NFLPA* leadership that a deal could be accomplished.

Per Mortensen, the players are expected to evaluate so-called “finishing points,” fancy talk for “the last stuff we don’t agree about yet.”

Mort also echoes the notion that tension remains not regarding whether the NFLPA* will recertify as a union, but how that will happen. Even if the process of obtaining signatures can, in theory, be done electronically, the players want to do it their way. Specifically, they want players to sign cards when they show up at team facilities, a fairly simple process that could get the task completed in a day or two after the gates open again. Though the motivation for the players’ insistence to do it this way isn’t clear, the fact remains that the players want to do it this way — and that the league has no real reason to fight the NFLPA* on this point.

So the players can approve the settlement on Friday, the players can show up Saturday and sign their union cards, the ratification can be finalized by Tuesday, and all free-agency hell can break loose on Wednesday.

Thursday was a big day. Friday could be an even bigger day. We hope you’ll stick with us from the moment you show up for work, until the moment you leave. And maybe even after that, if you’re willing to give up some of your non-work time for your non-work Internet habit.

Takeo Spikes says there will be a vote “when a fair deal is reached”Posted by Mike Florio on July 22, 2011, 10:09 AM EDT

Appearing this morning on ESPN’s SportsCenter, 49ers linebacker and NFLPA* representative Takeo Spikes talked about the timetable for a vote on the proposed CBA, which was approved Thursday by NFL owners.

“I expect a vote to happen when a fair deal is reached,” Spikes told Hannah Storm.

And that makes us even more confused about the somewhat bizarre gatekeeping function being performed by the Executive Committee and board of player representatives of a supposedly toothless trade association. Why should a small subset of all players have the ability to block a vote that hinges only on a simple majority of all players?

Moreover, how will the Executive Committee and board of player representatives decide what is and isn’t “fair,” and thus what should be passed along to the rank-and-file for a vote? Will it ride on a simple majority vote of the leadership? Or must they agree unanimously, like a jury at a criminal trial?

We’re fully prepared to respect the process, but it’s possible that these guys have too much power. And some of it may be going to their heads. If NFLPA* executive director DeMaurice Smith recommends the deal, then all players should have the right to vote on the deal. If 50 percent plus one agree, it doesn’t matter if 50 percent minus one disagree.

That’s the point we’ve been making for the past two days. The players hired De Smith to negotiate the labor deal. Once he recommends the deal, the players need to act on that recommendation. Or they need to get a new executive director.

Meanwhile, it’s hard not to wonder whether some of the aging veterans who are in this position of power over the rest of the players are hoping to tap the brakes for a couple of weeks to reduce the opportunities of young players to bump them from the starting lineup — and/or from the roster. Why should a guy care about the players losing 48 percent of the $200 million per week that will be forfeited when preseason games are canceled if the guy is more concerned about losing 100 percent of his NFL salary for 2011, and possibly beyond, if that fourth-round draft pick has enough time to show that he can do the job better, and cheaper, than the veteran?

UPDATE: One of the concerns Spikes raised about the proposed deal is the impact down the road of inflation. On a deal that pays the players 48 percent. Of the gross.

The whole "We were bamboozled" line by the players was just stupid. Like the owners are going to agree verbally with the players about things then write up a contract with something else written. It's not like the players are the only ones reviewing the contacts they have lawyers reading it too. Sign the stupid thing so we can start the fun!

The owners specifically stated that they wrote a supplemental revenue sharing plan into the CBA they approved; this was not something that had been negotiated with the players. In essence, they did indeed verbally agree to one plan and then voted on another. It may not be vastly different from the agreed-upon proposal but any change they made has to be evaluated by the players' lawyers. The owners also submitted strict timelines for union re-certification and insisted that the players sign the deal before having a chance to settle worker's comp, benefits, player conduct policies--the agreement says the players can only negotiate these things after signing the agreement and if they try to negotiate these items, the owners aren't obligated to accept any of the players' suggestions.

The players aren't blameless, of course. The owners are probably frustrated about the re-certification debate. The players will re-certify so all the bellyaching about that is mere posturing. Both sides need to get serious about finishing the deal and stop the pissing contest.

_________________Proud member of the Contract Extension for Schwartz Fan Club.

July 22nd, 2011, 11:52 am

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12296

Re: 2011 CBA Thread

PFT wrote:

ESPN backs off prediction that players will vote FridayPosted by Gregg Rosenthal on July 22, 2011, 10:55 AM EDT

On Thursday night, ESPN’s lockout coverage had a big banner in the upper left corner of my television screen.

“PLAYERS TO VOTE FRIDAY,” it said.

Later in the night, we noticed it was changed to:

“PLAYERS EXPECTED TO VOTE FRIDAY.”

Now ESPN’s Chris Mortensen is backing off that timeline. Speaking on SportsCenter Friday, Mort reported it was “unlikely” the players would vote on a new CBA on Friday.

NFLPA* DeMaurice Smith is at Myra Kraft’s funeral in Boston Friday. That helps put in perspective how trivial this labor drama is when you take a step back from things.

Mortensen is hearing from the NFLPA* that a conference call with a player vote could be possible Friday night, but more likely it would take place on the weekend or early next week. If there is no vote Friday, the timeline of free agency the league optimistically announced Thursday would presumably changed.

We’re not picking on Mort here. He broke a lot of ground throughout Thursday and kept viewers up to date throughout the process. His information on a likely Friday vote yesterday came directly from NFLPA* leadership, according to his reporting. It wasn’t off the record.

Once again, it’s a reminder that no one knows exactly how this will all end. Not even those leading the process.

With NFLPA* executive director DeMaurice Smith attending funeral services for Myra Kraft, the wife of Patriots owner Robert Kraft, NFLPA* president Kevin Mawae has issued a statement regarding the status of the talk.

“Player leadership is discussing the most recent written proposal with the NFL, which includes a settlement agreement, deal terms and the right process for addressing recertification,” the statement from Mawae reads. “There will not be any further NFLPA statements today out of respect for the Kraft family while they mourn the loss of Myra Kraft.”

It’s possible that a vote on the proposed deal will come today, but not likely. NFLPA* leadership remains cautiously optimistic that a deal will be finalized soon. The key at this point will be for the NFL to respect the players’ chosen method of reconstituting the union.

Report: Players want opt out clause included in CBAPosted by Gregg Rosenthal on July 22, 2011, 11:42 AM EDT

t’s clear that issues remain between the players and owners.

In the scheme of things, we’re not sure that these are huge issues and we remain optimistic like NFLPA* leadership that a deal can be reached fairly soon. As we’ve seen, however, closing is the hardest part.

One of the hanging issues is apparently the lack of an opt out clause in the agreement.

The NFL announced last night there would be no opt out. Chris Mortensen of ESPN reports some players want an opt out after seven years. If either side opted out, they would have to accept a penalty to do so.

We’re a little confused why this is a last minute issue. We have to think DeMaurice Smith knew these were the terms when he got off the phone with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell Thursday evening.

It’s unclear how serious the players are about this issue or what mechanism the owners even have to negotiate further at this point. Would another vote be necessary?

NFL Players Association president Kevin Mawae said in a statement Friday morning that the NFLPA was still "discussing the most recent written proposal with the NFL" but would not be releasing any further statements Friday out of "respect for the Kraft family while they mourn the loss of Myra Kraft."

NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith attended Myra Kraft's funeral in the Boston area and is scheduled to return to Washington, D.C., by midafternoon.

A player vote on the proposed labor agreement owners ratified Thursday is still possible later Friday. However, the logistics of coordinating a conference call after the day of travel make it less likely.

• An opt-out clause seven years into the proposed 10-year collective bargaining agreement;

• To be allowed to report to team facilities and vote in person on recertifying as a union.

The owners believe the NFLPA could recertify as a union by allowing the estimated 1,900 players to use electronic signatures, NFLPA leadership is adamant that it adhere to the same thorough process that led to decertification.

Owners voted 31-0 to accept the proposed collective bargaining agreement, with the Oakland Raiders abstaining, after a full day of meetings at an Atlanta-area hotel.

On abstaining from the owners' vote, Raiders CEO Amy Trask told NFL.com: "We had profound philosophical differences of a football and an economic nature," adding, "we voted the way we thought was appropriate."

Under the conditions of the owners' proposal, the players would have Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of next week to try to bargain any changes to the proposed CBA. Any changes would have to be agreed to by owners in order to be incorporated into the agreement, which would then become final July 30. If the NFL does not agree to the players' proposed changes, the old CBA terms on issues such as benefits, discipline and safety will remain unchanged for another 10 years.

NFL general managers and other team executives are meeting Friday to discuss specifics of the labor agreement approved by owners and make plans for the season while awaiting the players' vote on the deal. Four executives from each team have been invited to Friday morning's session at a hotel near the Atlanta airport.

Evans wrote: "Here is what the "Real" fans need 2 know: The owners tried 2 slip many things n2 the CBA "they" voted on that were NEVER agreed 2! #PRPlay"

Holliday wrote: "Look guys I have no reason to lie! The truth of the matter is we got tricked, duped, led astray, hoodwinked, bamboozled!"

And Ochocinco wrote: "Smart move by the owners to gain positive public perception and pressure the players into a bad deal shifting the negativity on us #kudos"

Before NFLPA leaders had seen the owners' proposal, Smith wrote in an email to the 32 player representatives: "Issues that need to be collectively bargained remain open; other issues, such as workers' compensation, economic issues and end of deal terms, remain unresolved. There is no agreement between the NFL and the players at this time."

Multiple owners, however, insisted both sides had reached an agreement.

"We believe we have an agreement," added New York Giants owner John Mara. "Now it's up to the players."

Green Bay Packers CEO Mark Murphy told the reporters in a conference call that the owners have "put our pens down" and are done negotiating.

"We've negotiated in good faith with the union. We've reached an agreement on all the key points," Murphy said on the call, according to the National Football Post. "They know what we ratified and they're voting to ratify the same thing."

The proposed deal would make significant changes in offseason workout schedules, reducing team programs by five weeks and cutting organized team activities (OTAs) from 14 to 10 sessions. There will be limited on-field practice time and contact, and more days off for players.

Current players would be able to stay in the medical plan for life. They also will have an injury protection benefit of up to $1 million of a player's salary for the year after his injury and up to $500,000 in the second year after his injury.

A total of $50 million per year will go into a joint fund for medical research, health-care programs, and charities.

One other rule the two sides have agreed on for the coming season: NFL gameday rosters will expand from 45 to 46 players, with the No. 3 quarterback no longer counting as an inactive player, a league source told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter.

If the players approve the deal, the NFL would get back to work right away:

• On Saturday, teams can stage voluntary workouts at club facilities, and players may be waived. Contracts can be re-negotiated and clubs can sign draft picks and their own free agents. Teams can also negotiate with, but not sign, free agents from other clubs and undrafted rookies.

• On Sunday, teams can sign undrafted rookies.

• On Wednesday, free agency opens in full, and all training camps will open with a 90-man roster limit; activities that day will be limited to physicals, meetings and conditioning. All clubs must be under the salary cap.

The players need to shut up and stop calling it a "bad deal." It is getting on my nerves...

I agree. I dont think ive been pissed off in this sort of way ever in my life.

Do you read your phone contract before you sign? This is a 10 year agreement with no opt out, and only 3 days to negotiate any outstanding issues once they sign. If the owners don't want to negotiate anything, they can just ignore them and they're stuck with it for 10 years. 99% of the current players won't be active in 10 years.

They NEEDED to take some time and read it over and get prepared with the issues due to that limited window. And yes, that limited window, with the current language of it, could cause legal issues. It just needs to be reworded, but if you don't go over it, you don't know what you're signing.

Not a single one of you would sign a contract at your job without reading it, and studying it.

And a good deal is a deal that both sides call a bad deal.

July 22nd, 2011, 1:07 pm

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12296

Re: 2011 CBA Thread

njroar wrote:

kdsberman wrote:

steensn wrote:

The players need to shut up and stop calling it a "bad deal." It is getting on my nerves...

I agree. I dont think ive been pissed off in this sort of way ever in my life.

Do you read your phone contract before you sign? This is a 10 year agreement with no opt out, and only 3 days to negotiate any outstanding issues once they sign. If the owners don't want to negotiate anything, they can just ignore them and they're stuck with it for 10 years. 99% of the current players won't be active in 10 years.

They NEEDED to take some time and read it over and get prepared with the issues due to that limited window. And yes, that limited window, with the current language of it, could cause legal issues. It just needs to be reworded, but if you don't go over it, you don't know what you're signing.

Not a single one of you would sign a contract at your job without reading it, and studying it.

And a good deal is a deal that both sides call a bad deal.

While I do understand you're point, I think the main reason so many fans are upset is because, according to reports, this is the deal that was agreed upon by both sides, Roger Goodell AND De Smith, and now the players are balking. If they didn't want De to agree to anything, then they shouldn't have given him that power. Seems rather simple IMO.

_________________

Quote:

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....

July 22nd, 2011, 1:20 pm

aManNamedSuh

Heisman Winner

Joined: July 14th, 2005, 11:58 amPosts: 817

Re: 2011 CBA Thread

TheRealWags wrote:

While I do understand you're point, I think the main reason so many fans are upset is because, according to reports, this is the deal that was agreed upon by both sides, Roger Goodell AND De Smith, and now the players are balking. If they didn't want De to agree to anything, then they shouldn't have given him that power. Seems rather simple IMO.

Bingo

July 22nd, 2011, 1:34 pm

njroar

Player of the Year - Offense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 2841

Re: 2011 CBA Thread

But they do agree on the deal. The main issue i've been seeing from every source is the language of the timing. The owners believe the players are still a union, and are saying sign deal, THEN and only then will we negotiate these terms. But we're only giving you 3 days and if we don't feel like negotiating, we won't, and you'll abide by the rules for 10 years anyway.

The entire process was granted by the courts for them to negotiate as a union while being a trade association. Now we're back to the day 1 arguments before they decertified, that they're saying we can't negotiate these without you being a union. All that needs to be done is extend the timeline for them to recertify and negotiate those items and it would be done. The owners saying vote by this date, reform by this date or else, is where it gets people in a long negotiation pissed off.

Both sides have plenty of faults, but the way the owners pulled off this final little dig at the union decertification is what's caused the uproar. It'll get fixed, but its they're not going to jump because the owners say jump. The deal is essentially done. This was last second button pressing and reaction to that.

July 22nd, 2011, 1:35 pm

TheRealWags

Modmin Dude

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12296

Re: 2011 CBA Thread

njroar wrote:

But they do agree on the deal. The main issue i've been seeing from every source is the language of the timing. The owners believe the players are still a union, and are saying sign deal, THEN and only then will we negotiate these terms. But we're only giving you 3 days and if we don't feel like negotiating, we won't, and you'll abide by the rules for 10 years anyway.

The entire process was granted by the courts for them to negotiate as a union while being a trade association. Now we're back to the day 1 arguments before they decertified, that they're saying we can't negotiate these without you being a union. All that needs to be done is extend the timeline for them to recertify and negotiate those items and it would be done. The owners saying vote by this date, reform by this date or else, is where it gets people in a long negotiation pissed off.

Both sides have plenty of faults, but the way the owners pulled off this final little dig at the union decertification is what's caused the uproar. It'll get fixed, but its they're not going to jump because the owners say jump. The deal is essentially done. This was last second button pressing and reaction to that.

Exactly! Its part of negotiations. Again, it sounds to me like several players talked/expressed their feelings/thoughts BEFORE they knew what the hell they were talking/complaining about. The only peeps that really know what is going on are Roger, De and the negotiating committees for each side and everyone should know that unless the information comes from this group, its probably BS especially and including the 'rank & file' players.